It does seem rather convenient doesn’t it. It’s like me going out and getting robbed and gunpoint and beaten up by the assailant, only to stagger into the Police Recpetion and before I say anything else point and shout "THAT’S HIM ON THE POSTER THERE, HE DID IT, THE ONE WHO THE WHOLE COUNTRY IS LOOKING FOR AND IS THE MOST NOTORIOUS, YES THAT ONE THERE. Kathy was insistent! "

"NOT THE ONE WIT THE LONG SCRAGGLY HAIR AND WHO’S WANTED FOR THE AVERAGE CRIME OF GRANT THEFT, NO NOT HIM, IT’S THE POSTER AND COMPOSITE NEXT TO IT. THE ONE THAT SAYS "MOST WANTED, DANGEROUS, AND ‘ZODIAC KILLER’ IN HUGE BOLD LETTERS. THATS THE ONE WHO TRIED ABDUCTED ME BEFORE FORGETTING HOW TO DRIVE AND HEADING STRIGHT INTO A ONE WAY LANE OF OMCOMING TRAFFIC!

Maybe the abductor had a wanted Zodiac paper clued to his face. We are dealing with a Criminal mastermind here lets remember!

Right? It’s not like The Z. burned anybody’s car at LHR, BRS, LB, or SF. Who knows, maybe she just wanted another car?

Well returning to Kath’s vehicle & seeming to now show another common train in Serial’s…. symptoms of Pyromania, Ok I can understand why he may wish to destroy Kathy’s vehicle by burning it yes, but what I can’t for the life of me work out is why he reattached her wheel, drove the car to a different spot, and torched it there. Why not just set it ablaze where it was and save yourself all the hassle of finding, reattaching the wheel and then going on a pleasant little trip down the road a bit to do something you could do without moving her car at all!

Well returning to Kath’s vehicle & seeming to now show another common train in Serial’s…. symptoms of Pyromania, Ok I can understand why he may wish to destroy Kathy’s vehicle by burning it yes, but what I can’t for the life of me work out is why he reattached her wheel, drove the car to a different spot, and torched it there. Why not just set it ablaze where it was and save yourself all the hassle of finding, reattaching the wheel and then going on a pleasant little trip down the road a bit to do something you could do without moving her car at all!

Ok.I can only take a very wild guess, as "this case is a mess", and propose, upon prearrangement, someone (1. a relative in cahoots to make help her carry this out, 2. maybe a hitchhiker she picked up or 3. a lover whom turned on her but she kept secret to avoid fault or charges) made off with the vehicle and torched the 13 y.o. clunker.

ref: "This case is a mess…In fact, of the three reports I’ve read, none detail any statements by Johns about being threatened in any way." http://www.zodiackiller.com/Johns.html

police report: http://www.zodiackiller.com/JohnsReport.html

So your of the opinion that she was kind of similar to Zodiac In that she like him had a desperate need for attention and so she and another person conspired to stage her abduction and blame it on San Francisco’s most infamous resident?

Well that is possible I suppose, buts she has no way of knowing if Zodiac would even acknowledge her claim let alone confirm it happened, unless the other conspiring participant in the Hoax was Zodiac Himself.

Zodiac didn’t offer ONE thing to prove he was the man who took KJ for her weird/intresting ride. In fact, he practically copied it from the Examiner.

Not to forget that his cipher is still unsolved..and that she had recognized him + described him with heavily rimmed glasses + that her assailant had used the ‘wobbling tire’ car trick..similar to the incident of Eleanor Maher (Modesto, 08-18-66 San Mateo Times) and ‘a Simi woman’ as well as a ‘Conoga park woman’ (both unidentified, Van Nuys Valley News 11-29-1967)

QT

See that happens quite a lot. People come storming onto a thread saying "There’s no evidence Zodiac has offered for Johns abduction’ as if I have spent the previous 20 post’s telling everyone that Zodiac gave 100 bits of evidence an is responsible because I have decided he was lol.

Q, I never said he did offer any evidence lol. Chill out

So your of the opinion that she was kind of similar to Zodiac In that she like him had a desperate need for attention and so she and another person conspired to stage her abduction and blame it on San Francisco’s most infamous resident?

Well that is possible I suppose, buts she has no way of knowing if Zodiac would even acknowledge her claim let alone confirm it happened, unless the other conspiring participant in the Hoax was Zodiac Himself.

Its just my big dumb assumption, and I could be flat out wrong, that this may have been used for attention towards herself unlike The Z. whom was seeking to direct attention away from him and at other suspects.

Zodiac didn’t offer ONE thing to prove he was the man who took KJ for her weird/intresting ride. In fact, he practically copied it from the Examiner.

Not to forget that his cipher is still unsolved..and that she had recognized him + described him with heavily rimmed glasses + that her assailant had used the ‘wobbling tire’ car trick..similar to the incident of Eleanor Maher (Modesto, 08-18-66 San Mateo Times) and ‘a Simi woman’ as well as a ‘Conoga park woman’ (both unidentified, Van Nuys Valley News 11-29-1967)

QT

Good morning QT, good point. It’s 2:57 a.m. here and I’m too sleepy to check. Were those women slain and their cars burned?

quote="Victor"]

So your of the opinion that she was kind of similar to Zodiac In that she like him had a desperate need for attention and so she and another person conspired to stage her abduction and blame it on San Francisco’s most infamous resident?

Well that is possible I suppose, buts she has no way of knowing if Zodiac would even acknowledge her claim let alone confirm it happened, unless the other conspiring participant in the Hoax was Zodiac Himself.

Its just my big dumb assumption, and I could be flat out wrong, that this may have been used for attention towards herself unlike The Z. whom was seeking to direct attention away from him and at other suspects.

As I’ve always said, because we are dealing with a cold case here, where the offender/s are unknown, as are many of the questions remain unanswerable, we can only speculate as to much of it, theorise a fair bit to try and work out what may be the reason for something, and have personal opinions but I always remind myself that when there are two people holding opposing opinions on the same issue, say myself and you on why Zodiac replaced her wheel, I keep in mind that there is just as much chance that you turn out to be correct as there is that I am the correct party.

It’s because I have seen, and absolutely hate with passion, people who are correct 100% of the time at a minimum, and any evidence to prove or suggest they are wrong is dismissed and ignored in favour of self deluding one’s self into falsehoods. Stanton Freidman has a quote I’ve come across often that is relevant to how some people operate and it’s "Don’t bother me with things like facts and evidence, my mind is already made it so anything else is not relevant."

I try my absolute best to remain open to others views opinions and suggestions because I don’t ever want to become half as bad as some who seem to have a very severe case of blinkered, tunnel vision when looking at the case….

"Ahhha! That bit there supports what I claim! That bit there almost categorically rules it out being the truth it’s best to just ignore that and pretend it doesn’t exist or create an explanation to explain why it seems to contradict you entire theory or belief.

I mean I guarantee that should certain suspects ever be ruled out conclusive there will be left a few faces looking completely baffled and shocked and not able to work out how this could be the case. Well I will really have to show some self control on that day and not instantly send an email that reads "Dear Sir. I am not one to say I told you so, but I told you so. This is what happens when you seem to decide the only evidence that matters is evidence you say and want to matter.

If you determined to try and built a case of chocolate on a white hot foundation, don’t be too surprised and shocked when it melts into nothing in front of you.

Zodiac didn’t offer ONE thing to prove he was the man who took KJ for her weird/intresting ride. In fact, he practically copied it from the Examiner.

Not to forget that his cipher is still unsolved..and that she had recognized him + described him with heavily rimmed glasses + that her assailant had used the ‘wobbling tire’ car trick..similar to the incident of Eleanor Maher (Modesto, 08-18-66 San Mateo Times) and ‘a Simi woman’ as well as a ‘Conoga park woman’ (both unidentified, Van Nuys Valley News 11-29-1967)

QT

Good morning all. QT, I just remembered the spreadsheet which I will consult. QT and WC, Later tonight, I may POSSIBLY begin to work up a Zodiac matrix in a spreadsheet to compare and contrast other suspects and POIs.

Zodiac didn’t offer ONE thing to prove he was the man who took KJ for her weird/intresting ride. In fact, he practically copied it from the Examiner.

Not to forget that his cipher is still unsolved..and that she had recognized him + described him with heavily rimmed glasses + that her assailant had used the ‘wobbling tire’ car trick..similar to the incident of Eleanor Maher (Modesto, 08-18-66 San Mateo Times) and ‘a Simi woman’ as well as a ‘Conoga park woman’ (both unidentified, Van Nuys Valley News 11-29-1967)

QT

If the women were proven to have anything at all with the Zodiac killer, you might be on to something.

Had KJ seen Zodiac in the act of murder or simply from a wanted poster of a thousand men who looked just like it?

LE would be wrong to just assume it wasn’t Zodiac. Why wouldn’t they/we consider it? KJ thought it was him and Zodiac said it was him. That avenue should have definitely been explored…and it was. And still remains a possibility.

The thing is, there needs to be proof. There wasn’t any. Kathleen had never seen him before. She never heard his voice or saw his car. Zodiac never offers any proof. No mention of KJ’s clothes or the baby blanket, etc.

You all may be right and it was Zodiac who was driving around tricking women (a first–I know..he changed his ways), but to lump Kathleen Johns into "Confirmed Victims", threre needs to be PROOF.

I sure am glad she didn’t end up dead that night. We may have had our answer either way, but I’d rather be left guessing.

She will always be unconfirmed.

LE would be wrong to just assume it wasn’t Zodiac. Why wouldn’t they/we consider it? KJ thought it was him and Zodiac said it was him. That avenue should have definitely been explored…and it was. And still remains a possibility.

The thing is, there needs to be proof. There wasn’t any. Kathleen had never seen him before. She never heard his voice or saw his car. Zodiac never offers any proof. No mention of KJ’s clothes or the baby blanket, etc.

You all may be right and it was Zodiac who was driving around tricking women (a first–I know..he changed his ways), but to lump Kathleen Johns into "Confirmed Victims", threre needs to be PROOF.

I sure am glad she didn’t end up dead that night. We may have had our answer either way, but I’d rather be left guessing.

She will always be unconfirmed.

Well, now I see that slightly different. There is one – definite – proof as Kathleen Johns has identified the Zodiac sketch as her perpetrator. She, being a victim of his attack, never changed that in her mind, as far as I know.

Second there are police reports matching her identification and description of the Zodiac sketch in at least 2-3 issues.

Third there is also the letter of Z claiming to have attacked a woman with her baby, even specifying that the ride lasted a couple of hours. Finally, in reverse selection, there had been no other comparable incidents with a woman and her baby. And, like in other Z attacks, Kathleen John’s assailant had actively used a torch light.

So if someone doesn’t require the named and addressed signature under such a confession (Kathleen Johns) letter, I’d say she is a confirmed ‘victim’. Overmore, MO, time frame as well as the region is a fit, too.

QT

LE would be wrong to just assume it wasn’t Zodiac. Why wouldn’t they/we consider it? KJ thought it was him and Zodiac said it was him. That avenue should have definitely been explored…and it was. And still remains a possibility.

The thing is, there needs to be proof. There wasn’t any. Kathleen had never seen him before. She never heard his voice or saw his car. Zodiac never offers any proof. No mention of KJ’s clothes or the baby blanket, etc.

You all may be right and it was Zodiac who was driving around tricking women (a first–I know..he changed his ways), but to lump Kathleen Johns into "Confirmed Victims", threre needs to be PROOF.

I sure am glad she didn’t end up dead that night. We may have had our answer either way, but I’d rather be left guessing.

She will always be unconfirmed.

Well, now I see that slightly, but only slightly different. There is one – definite – proof as Kathleen Johns has identified the Zodiac sketch as her perpetrator. She, being a victim of his attack, never changed that in her mind, as far as I know.

Second there are police reports matching her identification and description of the Zodiac sketch in at least 2-3 issues.

Third there is also the letter of Z claiming to have attacked this woman with her baby. And finally, in negative selection, there had been no other incidents with a woman and her baby.

So if someone doesn’t need the named signature under a confession letter (Kathleen Johns letter), I’d say she is confirmed. Overmore, MO and region is a fit, too.

QT

Did you read the Examiner article??

How does someone saying her guy looked like another guy prove it was the guy? I give up…

LE would be wrong to just assume it wasn’t Zodiac. Why wouldn’t they/we consider it? KJ thought it was him and Zodiac said it was him. That avenue should have definitely been explored…and it was. And still remains a possibility.

The thing is, there needs to be proof. There wasn’t any. Kathleen had never seen him before. She never heard his voice or saw his car. Zodiac never offers any proof. No mention of KJ’s clothes or the baby blanket, etc.

You all may be right and it was Zodiac who was driving around tricking women (a first–I know..he changed his ways), but to lump Kathleen Johns into "Confirmed Victims", threre needs to be PROOF.

I sure am glad she didn’t end up dead that night. We may have had our answer either way, but I’d rather be left guessing.

She will always be unconfirmed.

Well, now I see that slightly, but only slightly different. There is one – definite – proof as Kathleen Johns has identified the Zodiac sketch as her perpetrator. She, being a victim of his attack, never changed that in her mind, as far as I know.

Second there are police reports matching her identification and description of the Zodiac sketch in at least 2-3 issues.

Third there is also the letter of Z claiming to have attacked this woman with her baby. And finally, in negative selection, there had been no other incidents with a woman and her baby.

So if someone doesn’t need the named signature under a confession letter (Kathleen Johns letter), I’d say she is confirmed. Overmore, MO and region is a fit, too.

QT

QT, Had this been a ploy for attention or someone else whom she had mistaken for The Z, I don’t see KJ admitting it was a lie or a mistake.
The small "problem" I have with this is why there wasn’t any serious investigation into him and a new serial killer announced (ie The Roadside Strangler) if this was a recurring MO.

More on Kathleen Johns: "KJs friend said that KJ "tried to tell them the driver did threaten her life",etc,but they really "didn’t listen" and ‘didn’t put it in the reports.’ Again,they saw her manner of dress and appearance( which was "hippie")and just didn’t want to do a kidnap. This would bring the Feds in also and more paper and foot work. " by Howard Davis (Howard) @ http://www.zodiackiller.com/mba/opzv/716.html

Video: In the footsteps of "The Kathleen Johns Encounter" — Zodiac Killer hosted by Gian Julian Quasar @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zCxkCZlIcA